NOTES AND COMMENTS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVI, Issue 23491, 31 October 1939, Page 6

NOTES AND COMMENTS

AFTER THE NIGHTMARE We British cannot doubt the issue, writes Mr. A. G. Gardiner. At whatever cost, Hitlerism will he wiped off the face of the earth, finally, irrevocably. It' Will be wiped off because tho free spirit of mankind will never allow this tide of barbarism i k o submerge all the civilisation achieved by centuries of sacrifice. And, when the nightmare has passed, we shall return to the task of establishing tho world unity by consent, which will have , been made the more urgent by the revelation we have had that tho only alternative to the universal reign of law is the universal anarchy with which Hitler to-day threatens the earth. SURVIVAL OF PERSONALITY "Though science is unable to provide any positivo evidence for survival of personality after - death, it must acknowledge that belief in such survival is a powerful ethical factor in human development," said Sir Richard Gregory, in his presidential address to tho British Association for the Advancement of Science. "It is just as permissible, therefore, to assume that another world awaits habitation by an exalted type of humanity after _ this earth has como to an end, as. it is to believe in tho external existence of personality. What existence awaits us when wo arc called away we cannot sav, biefc stimulus and high endeavour mav be found in Jhc hope that each thread of life is intended to contribute to the web designed, by its Creator. Though science may not be able to contribute much to the ultimate problems of spiritual beliefs, it does teach that every action carries with it a consequence—not in another world, but in this—to be felt cither, by ourselves or by others in our time or generations to come." THREAT AGAINST EMPIRE The free life, in every one of its essentials, is to-day challenged by the forces of aggression that menace the world, says the Round Table. The countries that have glorified aggression abroad have at home abolished tho rule of law, freedom of conscience and utterance, and the bases of economic freedom. What" they do among their own people, however, is no cause of war. It would go too far to say that these things are none of our business; for that would be to deny the unity of Western civilisation and the common humanity of all men. But it is neither our duty nor our desire to spend our own strength, and prejudice our own freedom, in order to change the mode of government of other countries. We are driven to resist designs of national aggrandisement by force in Europe, not because other countries have chosen wrongly, as we think, their own way of life, but because by their aggression they challenge ours. Iheir threat is pointed against the British Commonwealth and what it stands for.

DEFINING WAR-AIMS I hope the British Government will think a good deal before yielding to the demand that it shall issue more specific statements of its war aims than are contained in the speeches and declarations of Ministers. It is seldom wise to enlarge upon the self-evident, writes Mr. J. A. Spender. Looking round the world to-day we see nowhere the slightest doubt of why we are at war. Hitler himself has seen to it that all the nations should bo thoroughly instructed on this point. It was the war aims, open and secret, which were the greatest embarrassment in the making of peace in 1919. They left little room for moderation on the part of the victors and led to bitterness and recrimination between the Allies which have lasted to this day. Even the well-meaning 14 points of President Wilson added to the confusion. Some of the points were never accepted by the European Allies; some were inconsistent with others, or vague and ambiguous in their meaning. This history seems to me to convey its own warning against all -attempts to spread the definition of war aims beyond the simple, fundamental, and compelling motives which the whole world understands. Our great and sufficient aim is to destroy Hitlerism and all that it implies. RUSSO--GERMAN CONJUNCTION Across the diplomatic map of Europe, Germany and Russia are walking arm in arm. It is an amazing spectacle, but ifc lias happened before, writes Mr. Charles E. Gratke, foreign editor of the Christian Science Monitor. Stalin and Hitler took a cue from the Iron Chancellor and timed their moves with a deftness which Bismarck himself might envy. They raised the old spectre of uniting the potenial strength of Moscow and Berlin as a counterweight to the uniting forces of western Europe. Yet there is something more.

J'licy have submerged their ideological

differences to suit the convenience oi the moment. And for this, too, there is revealing precedent. Revealing things are not always written in the largest. type. This was true in November, 1902. During those crisp, autumn days, Communists and National Socialists walked arm' in arm down the streets of the German capital. A month before they had been fighting each other in the streets. A few weeks latpr they were at it again. Between times a common enemy and a common objective showed that ideologies may b« [ only uniform-deep. Nor have ideological differences interfered greatly with commercial relations between two countries whose economic pattern is complementary—Russia the supplier of raw materials; Germany the producer of machinery and industrial products. Nor have political "notions" bothered thee general staffs of the two countries, whose military experts have a record of: extensive co-operation since the Great War. And what is less often recalled is the fact that, both before and since the Hitler regime, there has been a basic political co-operation botwecn Berlin and Moscow. There have been disagreements and difficulties. There have been insults and propaganda. But one of the early diplomatic acts of the Hitler Government was to renew a treaty of friendship with Russia. Thus to announcement of Russo-German non-aggression plans, it is reasonably accurate to apply the phrase, credited to a French diplomatist: "We are astonished, but not surprised."